Hi,
I actually develop an Apache Stanbol engine based on UIMA.
With the help of Clerezza uima.utils I build this things :
- Bundle A :
* contains UIMA "core" bundles
* do the transformation from UIMA to Stanbol
* provide a service interface for UIMA aggregated AE
- Bundles B,C,...
* implements the service
This bundles only contains
- the aggregateAE xml definition, annotators xml definition, required
ressources
- osgi dependencies to needed annotators.
this kind of structure is really cool IMO as we just have to define AE
pipelines and bundle it.
As I'm new to UIMA and not aware of your specific term, I'm not sure to
well understand you point Marshall.
I use the 2.3.1-SNAPSHOT version of osgi addons and it's work.
The "bad point" I see with this osgi version it that I have really big
difficulties to correctly set up import/export packages... and leads to
an ugly config...
But I'm really not sure that osgi modules are the cause.
The really first cause could be my lack of OSGI culture.
Note that I "embed" osgi version of uima and modules inside my bundle,
because each time I try to free them into Felix I had problems... (the
first cause could still be the same :) )
Just want to share this usecase with you.
OSGI UIMA will rocks ! :)
++
On 07/20/2011 05:18 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
On 7/20/2011 8:13 AM, Jörn Kottmann wrote:
On 7/20/11 1:55 PM, Marshall Schor wrote:
What does it mean to "deploy" inside of an Apache Felix instance?
I did that once, and simply embedded everything in one bundle, even UIMA
itself. This way I could use UIMA plus some AEs to do analysis as a service
for other OSGi bundles inside Felix.
This suggests having a tool to make this "easy"; but also suggests that having
individual addon annotators packaged up as a "complete UIMA pipeline" may not be
very interesting to anyone.
Is this right? If so, perhaps we should not release this osgi versions in the
addons at this time. That also would reduce the size of the distribution
considerably (about 100 MB of 150 MB is for the OSGi versions). In computing
this, I also noticed that the tagger osgi packaging was missing the 19.5 mb of
statistical models...
-Marshall
Jörn
